LIFE Project evaluation and selection LIFE+ committee 28 July 2008

1) Reception and registration of proposals 2) Eligibility phase 3) Financial selection phase 4) Technical selection phase 5) Award phase 6) Setting up the initial long- and reserve lists 7) Revision phase 8) Setting up the final short- and reserve lists 9)Next steps after the committee meeting 10)Lessons learnt for LIFE+ 2008

1. Reception and registration of proposals

Reception and registration of proposals 707 proposals received on CD/DVD Information entered into ESAP Proposals per component: LIFE+ Environ. Policy & Governance325 LIFE+ Nature and Biodiversity264 LIFE+ Information & Communication118

Proposals submitted per policy area

Proposals submitted per Member State

2. Eligibility phase

Eligibility phase Checking the general eligibility criteria and the completeness of the proposal forms submitted Check of the financial annexes submitted (applicants other than public authorities) Request for additional information by if: - financial annexes are incomplete/missing - not more than one form is missing/incomplete - obligatory signatures are missing

Results of the eligibility phase Proposals retained585 82% immediately495 request additional information124 Proposals rejected122 18% immediately51 request additional information71

Eligibility phase: reasons for failure Ineligible without request for further information (51) several forms missing or incomplete 43 not submitted in electronic format 2 not submitted via the competent authority 3 beneficiary(ies) not legally constituted in the EU 3 Ineligible after request for further information (71) no reply within the deadline of 7 working days 36 resubmitted documents/ forms still incomplete26 beneficiary refused to submit the requested documents9

3. Financial selection phase

Financial selection phase Financial capacity assessment for all coordinating beneficiaries other than “public authorities” Request for additional proof in case of doubt about the “public authority” status declared in the proposal (by letter)

Financial selection phase: results Proposals rejected70 12% negative assessment (insufficient financial capacity)35 assessment not feasible (data incoherent/incomplete)4 auditor certificate not unqualified/adequate5 proof for public authority status not provided26 Proposals not evaluated6 1% Proposals retained226 39% Proposals from Public Authorities % ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ Total retained509 87%

4. Technical selection phase

Technical selection criteria LIFE+ Environmental Policy & Governance demonstration or innovation (or support to forest monitoring) ? LIFE+ Information & Communication awareness raising campaign (or training for forest fire agents) ? LIFE+ Nature 25% concrete conservation actions ? (2 exceptions: marine Natura 2000 inventories + support to monitoring) best practise or demonstration ? if relevant, appropriate conservation status (Natura 2000) ? LIFE+ Biodiversity 25% concrete conservation actions ? (2 exceptions: development biodiversity indicators + GMO risk assessment) demonstration or innovation ?

Technical selection phase: results

Technical selection: reasons for failure LIFE+ Environmental Policy & Governance Neither innovation nor demonstration: 4 LIFE+ Information & Communication Not within the scope of LIFE+ information & Communication: 4 LIFE+ Nature Not within the scope of this component: 5 Neither best-practise nor demonstration: 2 Less than 25% for concrete conservation actions: 18* Insufficient/ inadequate Natura 2000 conservation status:14* LIFE+ Biodiversity Not within the scope of LIFE+ Biodiversity: 6 Neither innovation nor demonstration (but often best-practise): 23 Less than 25% for concrete conservation actions: 10

5. Award phase

Award phase: evaluation criteria Name of the award criterionMaximum score Minimum Pass score Significant divergence 1. Technical coherence and quality 158> 3 2. Financial coherence and quality 158> 3 3. Contribution to the general objectives of LIFE+ 2512> 4 4. European added value 2512> 4 5. Complementarity and optimal use of the EU funding 105> 2 6. Transnational character 5-> 1 7. National added value according to the LIFE+ national authority 5-> 1 Total100

Award phase: 181 project retained

Technical Selection & Award: success rate (%)

6. Setting up the initial long- and reserve lists

Setting up initial long- and reserve lists Constraints: listing according to merit (scores) at least 50% for projects for Nature & Biodiversity respect of the national allocations (if possible) at least 15% for transnational projects (if possible) STEP 1: nature & biodiversity (inside Natl. Allocations) STEP 2: nature & biodiversity (≥ 50% available budget) STEP 3: remaining projects (inside Natl. Allocations) STEP 4: remaining projects (until 100% consumed) STEP 5: reserve list (10% Nature & Biodiversity; 10% others)

The initial list N° projectsAmounts allocated (€) Step Step Step Reserve list

The initial list: national allocations

7. Revision phase

Revision phase 168 projects admitted to revision (140 long-listed + 28 reserve listed projects) Revision aimed at clarifying open questions and improving the quality of the proposals some « Killer questions » to be asked Result:  Revised/reduced project budgets  Exclusion of ineligible costs/actions  Withdrawal of proposals possible

13 proposals withdrawn (either by Commission or by beneficiary itself) budget reductions in the remaining projects EC contribution for « Forest Focus » proposal reduced from 45 to 16.1 million € Revision phase: outcome

8. Setting up the final short- and reserve lists

The final list N° projectsAmount allocated Step Step Step Step Reserve list

Final shortlist: summary Number of projects: 143 LIFE+ amount to be committed: € % of this amount for: - projects for Nature & Biodiversity:51,2 % - transnational projects: 30,5 %

The final list: national allocations Blue: national allocation used White: national allocation not used Yellow: national allocation surpassed (all amounts in €)

Final shortlist Proposals submitted vs. projects retained per policy area

Final list by Member State and by component

Successful applicants invited to submit 3 paper copies of the proposal, with original signatures Unsuccessful applicants informed by letter about the reasons for project failure 9. Next steps after the LIFE+ Committee meeting

10. Lessons learnt for LIFE Eligibility criteria softened (> incomplete forms) Financial viability check restricted to private bodies Clarifications provided on the scope of LIFE+ Biodiversity and LIFE+ Information and Communication